Labor & Employment Law Daily Wrap Up, PROCEDURE—S.D. Fla.: Intrastate train line was RLA ‘carrier’ though not subject to SBT jurisdiction, (Apr 7, 2026)

By Ronald Miller, J.D.

The RLA does not define carriers as railroad companies subject to the STB.

The National Mediation Board was entitled to summary judgment finding that it had jurisdiction over a representation dispute between intrastate passenger rail carrier Brightline and a union that filed an application regarding the dispute and a requested an election, ruled a federal district court in Florida. Brightline argued that it was not subject to the jurisdiction of the NMB because it was not subject to the jurisdiction of the Surface Transportation Board, but the court agreed with the NMB that being subject to the STB is not a prerequisite to being subject to the RLA. Therefore, the NMB was within its authority to assume jurisdiction over the representation dispute between Brightline and its employees (Brightline Trains Florida LLC v. National Mediation Board, No. 1:24-CV24734-DPG (S.D. Fla. Mar. 31, 2026)).

The United States railway industry is overseen by several federal agencies, including the NMB and the Surface Transportation Board (STB). Pursuant to the Railway Labor Act, the NMB is responsible for resolving labor disputes and facilitating collective bargaining within the railroad industry. The STB’s responsibilities include overseeing the construction and operation of railways.

Miami to Orlando. Brightline is a privately owned passenger railroad company that operates exclusively in Florida, between Miami and Orlando, with intermediate stops in Aventura, Fort Lauderdale, Boca Raton, and West Palm Beach. In 2012, the STB found that it had no jurisdiction over Brightline’s proposed rail line because Brightline’s passenger operations would be solely intrastate and would not be a part of the interstate rail network.

In Boca Raton, the passenger rail station, parking garage, and track infrastructure were constructed and improved with funds from the Consolidated Rail Infrastructure and Safety Improvements (CRISI) grant program. Brightline currently operates between Miami and Orlando.

Representation dispute. Brightline employs On-Board Service Employees, which include train and service attendants, chefs, and culinary specialists. On August 8, 2024, a union filed an application with the NMB stating that Brightline’s employees were having a representation dispute. The union requested that the NMB conduct a dispute investigation and hold an election to identify the employees’ authorized representative. In response, Brightline argued that the NMB lacked jurisdiction over the representation dispute because (1) Brightline is not subject to the STB’s jurisdiction, and thus is not a carrier under the RLA, and (2) 49 U.S.C. § 22905(b) did not render Brightline otherwise subject to the RLA.

On November 12, 2024, the NMB found that Brightline is a carrier subject to the jurisdiction of the RLA pursuant to § 22905(b). Based on that determination, the NMB assumed jurisdiction over the union’s application and conducted a representation election. Following a majority vote for the union, the NMB certified it as the employees’ representative. On January 29, 2025, the union notified Brightline of its intention to negotiate with the employer on the employees’ pay and working conditions.

Carrier determination. On December 4, 2024, Brightline filed this action against the NMB, seeking to set aside the NMB’s determination that Brightline qualifies as a carrier under the RLA, subjecting Brightline to the NMB’s jurisdiction. On February 28, 2025, the union filed a Motion to Intervene, which was granted by the court. On August 29, 2025, the NMB and Brightline filed cross-motions for summary judgment.

Brightline argued that the “RLA expressly limits the NMB’s jurisdiction to railroads that are subject to the jurisdiction of the STB. Because the STB does not have jurisdiction over Brightline Florida, it is not a ‘carrier’ under Section 151, First of the RLA as a matter of law, and therefore is not subject to the NMB’s jurisdiction.” For its part, NMB argued that being subject to the STB is not a prerequisite to being subject to the RLA. The court agreed with the NMB.

The RLA does not define carriers as railroad companies subject to the STB. Rather, the RLA states that “‘carrier’ includes any railroad subject to the jurisdiction of the Surface Transportation Board[.]” The statute also provides examples of other entities considered carriers. And while § 151, First, excludes some entities from the definition of “carrier”, intrastate railways (like Brightline) are not excluded. Thus, the court found, Brightline is not excluded from the NMB’s jurisdiction merely because it is not subject to the jurisdiction of the STB.

NMB’s authority. Finally, the court was guided by additional RLA language detailing the NMB’s broad authority over representation disputes with carrier employees. According to 45 U.S.C. § 152, Ninth, “[i]f any dispute shall arise among a carrier’s employees as to who are the representatives of such employees... it shall be the duty of the [NMB]... to investigate such dispute[.]” According to 45 U.S.C. § 183(a), “either party to a dispute between an employee or a group of employees and a carrier or carriers by air may invoke the services of the [NMB].” Neither section limits the NMB’s jurisdiction to carriers that are subject to the STB.

Rail Infrastructure Program. The court further found that Brightline is a carrier subject to the RLA because it conducts operations over rail infrastructure constructed and improved with federal CRISI funds. Congress created the CRISI program to “assist in financing the cost of improving passenger and freight rail transportation systems in terms of safety, efficiency, or reliability.” CRISI grant conditions are set forth in 49 U.S.C. § 22905. And Section 22905(b) provides that an entity is considered a rail carrier as defined in Section 10102(5).

Section 10102(5), in turn, defines a rail carrier as “a person providing common carrier railroad transportation for compensation, but does not include street, suburban, or interurban electric railways not operated as part of the general system of rail transportation[.]”

While Brigthline acknowledged that it operates over rail infrastructure improved with CRISI grants, it nevertheless argued that “all Section 22905(b) does is further define who qualifies as a Section 10102(5) ‘rail carrier,’” and that “nothing in Section 22905(b) operates to make a person that is not otherwise subject to the STB’s jurisdiction a covered ‘carrier’ for purposes of the RLA.” Here, the court agreed with the NMB that “under § 22905(b), CRISI grant recipients are deemed rail carriers subject to the jurisdiction of the RLA.”

Section § 22905(b) states that a person that conducts rail operations over rail infrastructure constructed or improved with funding provided in whole or in part through a CRISI grant “shall be considered a rail carrier as defined in section 10102(5)... and any other statute … in which that definition applies including... the Railway Labor Act.” Thus, the court found that Brightline’s interpretation of the statute was erroneous.

Finally, the Court was unpersuaded by Brightline’s argument that the RLA’s use of the term “carriers” and § 22905(b)’s use of the term “rail carriers” represents a remarkable and key distinction. The RLA uses the broader term “carriers” as it applies both to air and rail carriers. And there would be no reason to use the broad term “carriers” in § 22905(b) because CRISI grants are limited to the improvement of railways and related infrastructure, not airways and airports. Thus, the court found that, under § 22905(b), Brightline is a carrier subject to the RLA.

Therefore, the court found, the NMB was within its authority to assume jurisdiction over the representation dispute between Brightline and its employees.

The case is No. 1:24-CV24734-DPG.

Judge: Gayles, D.

Attorneys: Ellen Crisham Pellegrini (Sidley Austin) for Brightline Trains Florida LLC. Anthony Erickson-Pogorzelski, U.S. Attorney's Office, for National Mediation Board, Markenzy Lapointe, and Merrick Garland.

Companies: Brightline Trains Florida LLC; National Mediation Board

Cases: Procedure Labor OrganizingElections AgencyNews FloridaNews